[WatchDog]

Anyone devolving to personal attacks on this one is gone.
Try me. Please.

...the NRA/KABA court threads...seem... primarily... to spout off on something they ... know nothing about....

... like witnessing two doofuses at the end of bar on the wrong side of the tracks trying to discuss the finer points of quantum mechanics.

... ill-informed opinions. ... shopworn attorney bashing ... once off that well-thumbed script, they're ... adrift without a compass ....

For continued hilarity, perhaps any medical professionals ... could ask the know-it-alls to go on about the best way to surgically remove a bullet from one's chest cavity. A lack of qualifications and/or knowledge has never stopped them from commenting on courtroom practice and procedure, why should a similar lack of a medical background stop them from holding forth on medicine?

Most, if not all, of these opinions are so off the mark as to be something just short of true legal comedy . What is especially precious ... is that many of these self-styled legal eagles ...

the evident commercial nature of KABA and Mr. Lucas involvement..


Why do you KABA people keep posting the same angry attacks in multiple threads, Tempest (nicki)? It's almost as if you were trying to foment dissent amongst shooters.

Smells a lot like personal attack to me. Attributing differences of opinion to stupidity, lack of qualification, etc., as a way to dismiss and evade the substance. Ad hominem. And then, hypocritically, preemptively accusing the victim to cover the attacker's ad hominem M.O. Very slick. But somewhat transparent.

"Try me"? You've clearly been tried. Will you fulfill the promise?

BTW, how many 2A civil libertarians subscribe to the notion that you have to be an attorney to know your constitutional rights? Great POV for the legal profession to promulgate, of course.

[/QUOTE] $52000 for legal reasearch.......[/QUOTE] Apparently this guy has an idea and an opinion about how much legal costs for appelate and Supreme Court Cases. From what I know, $52m is a pittance for a case like this.

Since WildAlaska opened the door to impugning Lucas' motives to greed, I could ask Wild Alaska if perhaps he could enlighten us as to how much Halbrook, Kopel, Kates, Michel, et al., are getting for their "incremental", some would argue perpetual, work, and how much of it comes from the NRA? Would that question not be fair at this point, since THR is letting WildAlaska and others get away with vicious allegations?

[Thumper]

Hey WatchDog...welcome to THR.

Lawdog said personal attacks...what you mentioned looks pretty general to me...and pretty tame.

"Try me"? You've clearly been tried. Will you fulfill the promise?

Since you're new here, I should be neighborly and help you out: LawDog's been around awhile...he might frown on what some more cynical individual might perceive as manipulation.

[WatchDog]

There are clearly personal attacks above, Thumper, vicious ones.

"$52,000... 'nuff said"? Mentions the recipients of this supposed greed, by name, and that's not a personal attack? Who do you think you're kidding? Yourself?

The truth is the truth, the high road is the high road, the low road is the low road. Allowing personal attacks by one side to be defined as reasoned argument, while silencing the other side for calling them on it, turns the high road into an Orwellian low road. It's an Orwellian abuse of power over a board called "The High Road".

So, yes, I'm new here, and your apparent play to silence me, while simultaneously "welcoming" me, is noted.

You essentially said I need to suck up to the moderator, rather than simply tell the truth. Is the moderator so unfair, so sensitive, so small shouldered, and such a primadonna that he can't handle a complaint and an observation that there appears from a newcomer to be a pretty heavy dose of unfairness and hypocrisy being tolerated? If that's how it works here, go ahead and shut me down.

The power to suppress dissent doesn't change the truth, which is there for all to see. If they want to, the folks who run this discussion board can turn it into a sad little playpen where the few remaining participants all agree with each other, and they can wield total power and reign supreme over it. But I very much doubt they want to do that.

I don't take well to threats, and I'm not good at prostituting my convictions and being silenced when I see unfairness and hypocrisy. Sure, I'd like to participate, but not at the expense of my soul.

So why don't you just deal with the Lucas' argument, instead of smearing him and KABA over a measley $52,000?

Now, Moderator, will you fulfill your word that those engaging in personal attacks are "gone"? If so, Wild Alaska and others should already be gone. Or will you punish the victims, or shoot the messenger, as Thumper suggests?

[Baba Louie]

Welcome to THR WatchDog

Interesting first set of posts. May I recommend a cooling down period for a bit?
I read all of the posts on each of the threads... there was some heat there. It got shut down as it should've (IMO)

4.) ...personal attacks are prohibited. You can disagree with other members, even vehemently, but it must be done in a well-mannered form. Attack the argument, not the arguer.

Pretty simple rules.

5.) We cannot provide a comprehensive list of "Things Not To Say".Posts that are contrary to the above policies, or to the mission of The High Road, may be edited or deleted at our sole discretion. Membership may be revoked if such a step is deemed necessary by us. We're a private venture enabled by an all-volunteer staff. Please treat this venue as a polite discussion in a friend's home and respect the wishes of the hosts.

A note on FREE SPEECH:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment is greatly respected here on The High Road, as are all other Amendments that the Second Amendment defends. However, The High Road is private property and requests that members adhere to all forum policies. It is a contract agreed to by all who become members of The High Road. Those who break forum rules cannot invoke censorship or freedom of speech - a contract broken is a contract broken. If you do not like the rules of conduct or the acceptable topics, seek out a new venue to frequent or start your own board.

If you feel you can abide by these requests, we hope that you join us on The High Road. We invite you to share your expertise and enjoy the camaraderie. "Share what you know, learn what you don't."

I like the last eight words therein.

Stick around and debate... heatedly even... May I also recommend exercise caution when dealing with All of the Mods as they do call the shots? Lots of ways to discuss the 2nd, pro and con.
Course, my words are just words trying to keep things calm, cool and collected.

Adios

[LawDog]

Goodness.

A challenge.

First, this off-topic stuff needs a thread of its own. Like so.

Now.

You don't like it here, take yourself somewhere else.

You don't think I'm fair? Get over it.

You think THR is is an Orwellian power play? Ain't nobody nailed your feet to the floor. Shoo. Vamoose. Git.

It's a simple as that.

The Staff here at THR will decide what consitutes a personal attack - not you.

If you don't like the way we do things, there's the door. Go forth and find yourself a Forum more conducive to you. If you can't find one, billboard/bulletin software is cheap - create your own, run it the way you want.

Now, hook your eyeballs on your monitor and pay attention, because I'm only going to say this once and I don't want any further misunderstandings on your part.

The High Road is not accountable to you. The Staff at THR are not accountable to you. I am not accountable to you.

You have absolutely no right to demand anything from me, is that perfectly clear? You have no right to demand an explanation. You have no right to demand that I do something.

You may, of course, ask for an explanation whatever it is that I am doing that is bothering you, and I will be pleased to discuss it with you.

I do hope this clears up your misunderstanding.

You have a problem with me in the future, send me an e-mail or a PM. Better yet, send one to Oleg Volk: he owns this site.

LawDog

[Art Eatman]

Folks might give some thought to the idea that "personal attacks" refers to members.

The moderators have kicked it around, with no particular firm conclusion, SFAIK, but the personal-attack rule does not apply to non-members. Dunno if that's the best, but for now that's the way it is.

I have found that it's quite possible to express scorn without making an attack out of my statements, even for "Outsiders".

:), Art